If any of you think Utah and Colorado were invited to the Pac-12 for purely academic reasons, you're not paying attention. They were invited first and foremost for their TV market sizes (Colorado = Denver, Utah = Salt Lake City). Academics may have played a part, but it was NOT the main reason. Like always, money was the main reason....TV market size means more eyeballs on more TV sets means more ad revenue means more money charged for carrying the Conferences games.

SEC FAN, most of the schools in your beloved conference schedule shit opponents out of conference and when they actually don't, it's usually someone they play at home. MAJOR kudos to LSU for playing Oregon last year though, even if playing in Dullass did favor them somewhat. Now that there's going to be a playoff with a selection commitee, I think the days of schools loading up on FCS/crappy FBS schools is about over. An upset 2 point loss to say Iowa for example with an otherwise 10-1 record, I am hopeful will carry more weight with a commitee than an 11-0 record and a blowout of say Northern Iowa.

For those of you that want to see Price not be the starter next year, it sounds like the competition will be opened up from what Sark was quoted as saying in this morning's Steve Kelley column titled Keith Price's play guarantees his future isn't guaranteed. Read it here:http://seattletimes.com/html/stevekelle ... ley23.html

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:SEC FAN, most of the schools in your beloved conference schedule shit opponents out of conference and when they actually don't, it's usually someone they play at home. MAJOR kudos to LSU for playing Oregon last year though, even if playing in Dullass did favor them somewhat. Now that there's going to be a playoff with a selection commitee, I think the days of schools loading up on FCS/crappy FBS schools is about over. An upset 2 point loss to say Iowa for example with an otherwise 10-1 record, I am hopeful will carry more weight with a commitee than an 11-0 record and a blowout of say Northern Iowa.

I don't disagree that the SEC schedule some weaker non conference teams. They pretty much have to. If you look at strength of schedule they play enough quality teams in conference. When 6 of the top 10 teams in the BCS are in your own conference, you do what you have to do. Having said that though most of them schedule one quality team with tradition. Alabama played Michigan, LSU played Washington, Florida always plays Florida State, Georgia always plays Georgia Tech, South Carolina always plays Clemson, And I think A&M have their rivalry with SMU (yes I know, not so hot after the death penalty). I know some of them get to play at home and its not worth debating but you are dead wrong about the days being over scheduling crappy teams. The selection committee isn't going to overlook anyone in the SEC because they know just getting through that conference with just 1 loss is an achievement. Just looking ahead at 2013 and Alabama has Va Tech, LSU has TCU, Florida has Florida State and Miami, Georgia has Clemson and Georgia Tech, and South Carolina has North Carolina and Clemson. Don't believe the hype. They schedule quality teams. Just like Georgia scheduled Boise State not too long ago. Some of you guys unfairly ridicule their non conference yet you schedule Eastern Washington and Portland State and your a bunch of hypocrites.

Most of the SEC fans who are highly interested love the playoff because based on the experts it sounds like more than 1 SEC team will be in the playoffs every year. We may even do away with the SEC Title Game in order to make sure we can have 2 undefeated or at least 1 undefeated and likely a 1 loss team to throw at the selection committee. And even if they continue with the SEC Title Game you may still have a team like Florida who gets into the BCS playoff since they were a 1 loss team and played 4 top 10 teams. The loser in that scenario is the team who loses in the SEC Title Game like Georgia did because it gave them a 2nd loss.